Conservative policy on migration

I am fascinated to read that Max Hastings, in an article critical of David Cameron's alleged silence on immigration (Comment, June 19), says "the only convincing step to stem the influx, [is] by setting an absolute limit on annual numbers". He is absolutely right and this was unveiled as Conservative policy by David Cameron when we launched a pamphlet, Controlling Economic Migration, by David Davis and me last November. In case Mr Hastings thinks that was done undercover, I refer him to the Guardian's own headline that day: "Tories propose migration limit based on needs of economy" (November 9, 2006). He complains further that this limit has not yet been set. It would be foolish to guess what it should be some years ahead, but we have made it clear that it would be substantially less than the current net influx of around 200,000 a year.

More recently, as he admits, I have proposed that those coming here for marriage should have a minimum age of 21 (up from the current 18) and should have to pass an English test. Conservatives believe in a controlled level of immigration, both for the benefit of the host community and of new migrants, and we will continue to say so. Damian Green MPShadow immigration minister

I would like to see immigration discussed as the complex issue it really is. That data is skewed and using asylum seekers as ammunition between parties is criminal. I despise Max Hastings' cliches: "Hundreds of thousands are entering Britain unwanted and apparently reluctant sincerely to embrace the union flag even when they get housing, benefits and jobs". What is most "unhealthy to democracy" is not the Tories' lack of position, but the lack of transparancy by all parties about the facts. It is no coincidence that the countries many migrants are fleeing from hold the mineral wealth our consumer economy relies so heavily on and pays so little for. Is it any wonder that we encourage an influx of people looking for work or a better life in our thriving economies? Surely any solution to this "challenge facing the west throughout the 21st century" must start with facing up to the causes? Susannah Readett-Bayley Paris

It is difficult to see the ethical reasoning behind the government promoting the UK as a "migration destination" for those with particular skills (Britain competes to attract migrants, June 19). Employers might like the idea, as it will help to keep wages down. But it is bad news for poorer countries, as the west poaches the most talented members of their workforce; and bad news for unemployed or low-paid people in the UK, who could be given training to provide them with the skills that we need. And it is bad news for first-time home buyers, as it increases demand for housing. Richard MountfordTonbridge, Kent